NFTs - Page 14

BowlOfRed · 28th April 2022, 10:34 AM

Originally Posted by Mongrel

He also pops up in Legal Eagles take on the legality of NFTs (TL: DW - Yikes!)

I did watch that one. I was much less familiar with any of the legal aspects and how most of it ties back to contract law. I thought it was pretty interesting.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th May 2022, 04:51 AM

NFT sales volume is plummeting.

Quote:

Sales of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) have fallen 92 per cent since September, according to new data.

Analysis by the website NonFungible, first cited by the Wall Street Journal, found that NFT sales fell to a daily average of 19,000 this week, compared to 225,000 seven months ago.

Active wallets, which are used to store NFTs, also dropped by 88 per cent. The article concluded: “The NFT market is collapsing.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/n...box=1651671640

EaglePuncher · 5th May 2022, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

NFT sales volume is plummeting.

https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/n...box=1651671640

Looks like they all 'gambled and lost'

SuburbanTurkey · 5th May 2022, 05:51 AM

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Looks like they all 'gambled and lost'

Not all. Many, but there's certainly a minority that made a killing during this nonsense. The promises of riches that drive these speculative bubbles aren't entirely a lie. There's always some winners at the casino, and a bunch of losers.

EaglePuncher · 5th May 2022, 06:03 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Not all. Many, but there's certainly a minority that made a killing during this nonsense. The promises of riches that drive these speculative bubbles aren't entirely a lie. There's always some winners at the casino, and a bunch of losers.

A few asswipes getting rich off of gullible losers is the whole purpose of bitcoin and nfts.

psionl0 · 5th May 2022, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

A few asswipes getting rich off of gullible losers is the whole purpose of bitcoin and nfts.

No it isn't.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th May 2022, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

No it isn't.

I dunno, I imagine the asswipes getting rich probably think so.

psionl0 · 5th May 2022, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

I dunno, I imagine the asswipes getting rich probably think so.

Wishful thinking. The only "asswipes" are the ones in your imagination.

SuburbanTurkey · 6th May 2022, 04:42 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

Wishful thinking. The only "asswipes" are the ones in your imagination.

I can understand thinking that NFTs have some legitimate usage, but outright denialism of the outright fraud and grifting that is constantly occurring in this space is certainly an absurd position.

psionl0 · 6th May 2022, 06:02 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

I can understand thinking that NFTs have some legitimate usage, but outright denialism of the outright fraud and grifting that is constantly occurring in this space is certainly an absurd position.

It is your apparent belief that anybody who makes any sort of profit out of this technology has automatically committed a fraud that I have a problem with.

It's the same principle whether it is cryptos, NFTs, stamps, gold etc. People buy them in the hopes that they will become more valuable as time passes. In the vast majority of cases, they are not looking for rubes that they can convince (lie to) to buy their wares at grossly inflated prices.

SuburbanTurkey · 6th May 2022, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

It is your apparent belief that anybody who makes any sort of profit out of this technology has automatically committed a fraud that I have a problem with.

It's the same principle whether it is cryptos, NFTs, stamps, gold etc. People buy them in the hopes that they will become more valuable as time passes. In the vast majority of cases, they are not looking for rubes that they can convince (lie to) to buy their wares at grossly inflated prices.

Considering the multiple occasions of people being criminally charged with fraud in this space, I'm assuming your "there are no asswipes" comment was a rhetorical flourish.

psionl0 · 6th May 2022, 08:02 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Considering the multiple occasions of people being criminally charged with fraud in this space, I'm assuming your "there are no asswipes" comment was a rhetorical flourish.

There are some "asswipes" in all walks of life. It has no special meaning within the context of cryptos or NFTs.

Gord_in_Toronto · 6th May 2022, 08:49 AM

Back on topic.

From 'rug pulls' to counterfeits, here are the biggest scams in the NFT space

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/nft...iner-1.6435126

Quote:

But for now, NFTs remain highly speculative and there are signs the market is weakening significantly.

According to data resource website NonFungible, NFT sales volumes have plummeted 50 per cent in the first quarter of 2022. The average price of an NFT has also fallen to around $2,500 US, down from $6,800 in January. As a result of waning demand, many NFT owners are finding their prized works are now commanding significantly smaller price tags.

Not ready for prime time?

EaglePuncher · 6th May 2022, 09:28 AM

Maybe it's time for a rebrand, since very soon they can't be exchanged for anything, maybe call em: Not at all fungible tokens?

SuburbanTurkey · 6th May 2022, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

Maybe it's time for a rebrand, since very soon they can't be exchanged for anything, maybe call em: Not at all fungible tokens?

There's not even anything fun to get on the cheap as a keepsake from this idiotic venture.

I still have the 3 Iraqi Dinar I bought for dirt cheap on eBay as a piece of scamming history to keep. I imagine many of these NFT links are going to be dead in a few years after the bottom falls out on the value of these things. I guess you could make a few high-res prints of your apes before it's too late.

At least with beanie babies you still had a stuffed animal at the end.

psionl0 · 6th May 2022, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

There's not even anything fun to get on the cheap as a keepsake from this idiotic venture.

Maybe, maybe not. But it is experience that is worth having. Most new enterprises fail in quick order and there is no reason why the NFT market should be any different.

Only time will tell if NFTs will still have a future but NFT "ownership" of digital assets in general doesn't seem to be an application for the future. However, there may be some classes of digital assets where an association with an NFT still makes sense.

EaglePuncher · 12th May 2022, 02:15 AM

I can't stop laughing.

NSFW

mumblethrax · 12th May 2022, 04:50 AM

Originally Posted by psionl0

But it is experience that is worth having.

The real NFT was the friends we made along the way.

Gord_in_Toronto · 12th May 2022, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by EaglePuncher

I can't stop laughing.

NSFW

Laff or cry? Otherwise, "Mostly harmless". Unless you buy in, I guess.

SuburbanTurkey · 24th May 2022, 09:05 AM

The ape-holders dilemma: Is a stolen ape still yours?

Quote:

Actor and producer Seth Green was robbed of several NFTs this month after succumbing to a phishing scam that inadvertently threw a monkey wrench into the plan for his new animated series. The forthcoming show was developed from characters in Green’s expansive NFT collection, but in light of the recent hack, the project’s blatant crypto optimism has become a tragically ironic reminder of the industry’s shadier side.

On Saturday, Green teased a trailer for White Horse Tavern at the NFT conference VeeCon. A twee comedy, the show seems to be based on the question, “What if your friendly neighborhood bartender was Bored Ape Yacht Club #8398?” In an interview with entrepreneur and crypto hype man Gary Vaynerchuk, Green said he wanted to imagine a universe where “it doesn't matter what you look like, what only matters is your attitude.”

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...stolen-tv-show

Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click.

But, the blockchain is quite clear that Green is not the current owner.

Green could be a crypto true believer and honor "code is law" and not move forward with this project that relies on IP the blockchain says does not belong to him.

Or he could assert his copyright (rightly) and use these doodles regardless what the blockchain says, which makes you wonder what point attaching the NFT to this "art" was to begin with.

Marras · 25th May 2022, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click.

Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US.

All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by Marras

Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US.

All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court.

That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP.

Marras · 25th May 2022, 04:52 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP.

It is quite certain that neither the thief nor people buying the NFT from them has copyright. Whether Green has or ever had it is more open question. It might well be that Yuga Labs still has it or that no one has it because the apes are not copyrightable at all.

Mongrel · 25th May 2022, 04:53 AM

The copyright isn't attached to the ownership of the NFT

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 04:57 AM

Originally Posted by Mongrel

The copyright isn't attached to the ownership of the NFT

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

.

It's a bit of a mess because the sellers of the NFTs have made all kinds of bizarre terms of service that tie intellectual property rights to the token.

Wildy · 25th May 2022, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by Marras

Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US.

All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court.

I do see what you mean by the contradictory terms. Part i. states that you own the NFT and says that you own the art completely, but then in parts ii. and iii. states that Yuga Labs grants you an exclusive licence which makes it seem that they still own the IP to the ape picture. If you actually own the ape then you couldn't be granted an exclusive licence to anything because you'd get them automatically as the IP is transferred to you through ownership.

In terms of the show I'd assume that Green provided a licence to the people making the show allowing them to use the ape in question. But then that would also depend on what that agreement says.

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP.

Theoretically you could "sell" the NFT from your scam account to another account you own and then try and claim copyright because the Etherium blockchain says you own the ape and the terms of BAYC say that that is how ownership is determined.

xjx388 · 25th May 2022, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

The ape-holders dilemma: Is a stolen ape still yours?

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...stolen-tv-show

Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click.

But, the blockchain is quite clear that Green is not the current owner.

Green could be a crypto true believer and honor "code is law" and not move forward with this project that relies on IP the blockchain says does not belong to him.

Or he could assert his copyright (rightly) and use these doodles regardless what the blockchain says, which makes you wonder what point attaching the NFT to this "art" was to begin with.

It's interesting that Seth Green succumbed to a phishing scam. I get it, anyone can be a victim, but that really should make anyone think about why they are pouring so much money into something so fragile.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by xjx388

It's interesting that Seth Green succumbed to a phishing scam. I get it, anyone can be a victim, but that really should make anyone think about why they are pouring so much money into something so fragile.

Not really.

NFTs is like a rube sifter. Only an absolute moron would pour more than petty change into such a dubious project. Anyone holding one of these high costs apes is, ipso facto, exactly the kind of rube that is easy to rip off.* It's like being surprised that everyone at a time-share seminar is prone to getting scammed. You have to have high levels of financial illiteracy to even be in this position.

ETA: at least, this is true for good-faith NFT buyers. I'm sure there's plenty of quite intelligent types on the predatory side of things that understand exactly what the score is.

I Am The Scum · 25th May 2022, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Wildy

Theoretically you could "sell" the NFT from your scam account to another account you own and then try and claim copyright because the Etherium blockchain says you own the ape and the terms of BAYC say that that is how ownership is determined.

Ownership of a reproducible medium (CD, book, etc.) does not imply copyright ownership. Also, I don't think there's anything BAYC can do to dictate how copyright transfer happens once it's out of their hands.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 10:28 AM

Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole:

Quote:

The Owner Of Seth Green's Stolen Bored Ape Said They Have No Plans To Return It

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner

Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it.

Quote:

Green did not respond to requests for comment. But his tweets make it abundantly clear that he’s willing to pursue legal action to reclaim the asset. On Tuesday, Green tweeted that he would “rather meet @DarkWing84 to make a deal, vs in court.” While NFTs have only begun to make an appearance in case law, Eric Goldman, an intellectual property and technology law professor at Santa Clara University, previously told BuzzFeed News that buyers of looted NFTs would likely be criticized for “not doing their homework.”

I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens.

Axxman300 · 25th May 2022, 10:44 AM

NFTs are the Beanie Babies of the cyber world.

If you can't see this one coming a mile away you might not be wise enough to have extra money in the first place.

theprestige · 25th May 2022, 11:30 AM

I get that the Gorillaz aesthetic isn't to everyone's taste, but personally I think the Bored Apes themselves are great art. Like Warhol's Soup Cans for a digital age. If they were being sold as unique physical artifacts, I'd happily buy sets of them and hang them on my walls at home. I'd even consider them likely to be a good investment.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by theprestige

I get that the Gorillaz aesthetic isn't to everyone's taste, but personally I think the Bored Apes themselves are great art. Like Warhol's Soup Cans for a digital age. If they were being sold as unique physical artifacts, I'd happily buy sets of them and hang them on my walls at home. I'd even consider them likely to be a good investment.

You're in luck, the ability to decorate your home is one right click and trip to the print shop away!

gnome · 25th May 2022, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner

Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it.

I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens.

If it goes to court, how does Seth Green lose? The existence or control of an NFT is not part of current copyright considerations. I do not think Mr. Cheese can be considered a "bona fide purchaser" (the manner in which an innocent purchaser can sometimes retain title despite adverse claims) when there is no binding provision for the purchase of an NFT to transfer copyright.

SuburbanTurkey · 25th May 2022, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by gnome

If it goes to court, how does Seth Green lose? The existence or control of an NFT is not part of current copyright considerations. I do not think Mr. Cheese can be considered a "bona fide purchaser" (the manner in which an innocent purchaser can sometimes retain title despite adverse claims) when there is no binding provision for the purchase of an NFT to transfer copyright.

I have no idea how binding these terms of service for these NFTs would be.

I think he has a great chance to prevail in court should he choose to sue. I also think there's a good chance the NFT community would turn on him if he did that, because a court declaring that he retains ownership of an NFT the blockchain unambiguously states belongs to someone else would amount to heresy.

gnome · 25th May 2022, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

I have no idea how binding these terms of service for these NFTs would be.

I think he has a great chance to prevail in court should he choose to sue. I also think there's a good chance the NFT community would turn on him if he did that, because a court declaring that he retains ownership of an NFT the blockchain unambiguously states belongs to someone else would amount to heresy.

Even worse, it might also depress prices in the NFT market.

Olmstead · 25th May 2022, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner

Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it.

I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens.

Is everyone in the NFT economy sniffing glue? If Seth Greene owns the requisite rights, he can just mint a new NFT with exactly the same assets. And if he doesn't own those rights, good luck using it commercially for anything other than a resale in the first place. The actual owner of those rights will come knocking the moment there's money to be made, and the judge won't care who owns a digital wafer.

carlitos · 25th May 2022, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole:

If it's really valuable enough to use in his terrible TV show, he could just buy the same character on a different background. There are up to 10,000 apes that would work, but I see one in particular that is literally identical.

Solitaire · 25th May 2022, 05:02 PM

No copyright gets transferred.

Actually, Yuga Labs owns the copyright to all the ape art. They assign license
rights to the holder of the NFT to display and profit off of the ape art. None
of the provisions deal with theft or loss of the NFT. And, in theory, the thief
by merely possessing the NFT can enjoy the same rights to display and profit
off of the NFT.

theprestige · 25th May 2022, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey

You're in luck, the ability to decorate your home is one right click and trip to the print shop away!

It's not the same, for me. Though it is tempting. I could install a big 2x4 array on my living room wall, take a beautifully composed and beautifully lit hi-res photo, and spam it all over social media to troll the NFT bros.

5th May 2022, 05:48 AM	#523
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey NFT sales volume is plummeting. https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/n...box=1651671640 Looks like they all 'gambled and lost'
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	__________________ You know you found a real "conservative" when they complain about virtue signalling while not realizing that they are virtue signalling.

5th May 2022, 06:03 AM	#525
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Not all. Many, but there's certainly a minority that made a killing during this nonsense. The promises of riches that drive these speculative bubbles aren't entirely a lie. There's always some winners at the casino, and a bunch of losers. A few asswipes getting rich off of gullible losers is the whole purpose of bitcoin and nfts.
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	__________________ You know you found a real "conservative" when they complain about virtue signalling while not realizing that they are virtue signalling.

5th May 2022, 09:00 AM	#526
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,069	Originally Posted by EaglePuncher A few asswipes getting rich off of gullible losers is the whole purpose of bitcoin and nfts. No it isn't.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

5th May 2022, 08:30 PM	#528
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,069	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey I dunno, I imagine the asswipes getting rich probably think so. Wishful thinking. The only "asswipes" are the ones in your imagination.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

6th May 2022, 06:02 AM	#530
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,069	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey I can understand thinking that NFTs have some legitimate usage, but outright denialism of the outright fraud and grifting that is constantly occurring in this space is certainly an absurd position. It is your apparent belief that anybody who makes any sort of profit out of this technology has automatically committed a fraud that I have a problem with. It's the same principle whether it is cryptos, NFTs, stamps, gold etc. People buy them in the hopes that they will become more valuable as time passes. In the vast majority of cases, they are not looking for rubes that they can convince (lie to) to buy their wares at grossly inflated prices.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

28th April 2022, 10:34 AM	#521
BowlOfRed Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Silicon Valley Posts: 2,130	Originally Posted by Mongrel He also pops up in Legal Eagles take on the legality of NFTs (TL: DW - Yikes!) I did watch that one. I was much less familiar with any of the legal aspects and how most of it ties back to contract law. I thought it was pretty interesting.

5th May 2022, 04:51 AM	#522
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	NFT sales volume is plummeting. Quote: Sales of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) have fallen 92 per cent since September, according to new data. Analysis by the website NonFungible, first cited by the Wall Street Journal, found that NFT sales fell to a daily average of 19,000 this week, compared to 225,000 seven months ago. Active wallets, which are used to store NFTs, also dropped by 88 per cent. The article concluded: “The NFT market is collapsing.” https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/n...box=1651671640

5th May 2022, 05:51 AM	#524
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by EaglePuncher Looks like they all 'gambled and lost' Not all. Many, but there's certainly a minority that made a killing during this nonsense. The promises of riches that drive these speculative bubbles aren't entirely a lie. There's always some winners at the casino, and a bunch of losers.

5th May 2022, 09:02 AM	#527
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by psionl0 No it isn't. I dunno, I imagine the asswipes getting rich probably think so.

6th May 2022, 04:42 AM	#529
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by psionl0 Wishful thinking. The only "asswipes" are the ones in your imagination. I can understand thinking that NFTs have some legitimate usage, but outright denialism of the outright fraud and grifting that is constantly occurring in this space is certainly an absurd position.

6th May 2022, 06:04 AM	#531
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by psionl0 It is your apparent belief that anybody who makes any sort of profit out of this technology has automatically committed a fraud that I have a problem with. It's the same principle whether it is cryptos, NFTs, stamps, gold etc. People buy them in the hopes that they will become more valuable as time passes. In the vast majority of cases, they are not looking for rubes that they can convince (lie to) to buy their wares at grossly inflated prices. Considering the multiple occasions of people being criminally charged with fraud in this space, I'm assuming your "there are no asswipes" comment was a rhetorical flourish.

6th May 2022, 08:02 AM	#532
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,069	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Considering the multiple occasions of people being criminally charged with fraud in this space, I'm assuming your "there are no asswipes" comment was a rhetorical flourish. There are some "asswipes" in all walks of life. It has no special meaning within the context of cryptos or NFTs.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

6th May 2022, 08:49 AM	#533
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,518	Back on topic. From 'rug pulls' to counterfeits, here are the biggest scams in the NFT space https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/nft...iner-1.6435126 Quote: But for now, NFTs remain highly speculative and there are signs the market is weakening significantly. According to data resource website NonFungible, NFT sales volumes have plummeted 50 per cent in the first quarter of 2022. The average price of an NFT has also fallen to around $2,500 US, down from $6,800 in January. As a result of waning demand, many NFT owners are finding their prized works are now commanding significantly smaller price tags. Not ready for prime time?
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

6th May 2022, 09:28 AM	#534
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	Maybe it's time for a rebrand, since very soon they can't be exchanged for anything, maybe call em: Not at all fungible tokens?
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	__________________ You know you found a real "conservative" when they complain about virtue signalling while not realizing that they are virtue signalling. Last edited by EaglePuncher; 6th May 2022 at 09:30 AM.

6th May 2022, 09:32 AM	#535
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by EaglePuncher Maybe it's time for a rebrand, since very soon they can't be exchanged for anything, maybe call em: Not at all fungible tokens? There's not even anything fun to get on the cheap as a keepsake from this idiotic venture. I still have the 3 Iraqi Dinar I bought for dirt cheap on eBay as a piece of scamming history to keep. I imagine many of these NFT links are going to be dead in a few years after the bottom falls out on the value of these things. I guess you could make a few high-res prints of your apes before it's too late. At least with beanie babies you still had a stuffed animal at the end.

6th May 2022, 09:46 AM	#536
psionl0 Skeptical about skeptics Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E Posts: 19,069	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey There's not even anything fun to get on the cheap as a keepsake from this idiotic venture. Maybe, maybe not. But it is experience that is worth having. Most new enterprises fail in quick order and there is no reason why the NFT market should be any different. Only time will tell if NFTs will still have a future but NFT "ownership" of digital assets in general doesn't seem to be an application for the future. However, there may be some classes of digital assets where an association with an NFT still makes sense.
	__________________ "The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

12th May 2022, 02:15 AM	#537
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	I can't stop laughing. NSFW https://nypost.com/2022/05/11/madonn...of-her-vagina/
EaglePuncher Muse Join Date: Jan 2022 Posts: 691	__________________ You know you found a real "conservative" when they complain about virtue signalling while not realizing that they are virtue signalling. Last edited by EaglePuncher; 12th May 2022 at 02:17 AM.

12th May 2022, 04:50 AM	#538
mumblethrax Species traitor Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 3,264	Originally Posted by psionl0 But it is experience that is worth having. The real NFT was the friends we made along the way.

12th May 2022, 06:01 AM	#539
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 22,518	Originally Posted by EaglePuncher I can't stop laughing. NSFW https://nypost.com/2022/05/11/madonn...of-her-vagina/ Laff or cry? Otherwise, "Mostly harmless". Unless you buy in, I guess.
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

24th May 2022, 09:05 AM	#540
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	The ape-holders dilemma: Is a stolen ape still yours? Quote: Actor and producer Seth Green was robbed of several NFTs this month after succumbing to a phishing scam that inadvertently threw a monkey wrench into the plan for his new animated series. The forthcoming show was developed from characters in Green’s expansive NFT collection, but in light of the recent hack, the project’s blatant crypto optimism has become a tragically ironic reminder of the industry’s shadier side. On Saturday, Green teased a trailer for White Horse Tavern at the NFT conference VeeCon. A twee comedy, the show seems to be based on the question, “What if your friendly neighborhood bartender was Bored Ape Yacht Club #8398?” In an interview with entrepreneur and crypto hype man Gary Vaynerchuk, Green said he wanted to imagine a universe where “it doesn't matter what you look like, what only matters is your attitude.” https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...stolen-tv-show Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click. But, the blockchain is quite clear that Green is not the current owner. Green could be a crypto true believer and honor "code is law" and not move forward with this project that relies on IP the blockchain says does not belong to him. Or he could assert his copyright (rightly) and use these doodles regardless what the blockchain says, which makes you wonder what point attaching the NFT to this "art" was to begin with.
	Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 24th May 2022 at 09:10 AM.

25th May 2022, 02:41 AM	#541
Marras Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 407	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click. Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US. All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court.
Marras Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 407

25th May 2022, 04:17 AM	#542
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by Marras Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US. All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court. That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP.

25th May 2022, 04:52 AM	#543
Marras Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 407	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP. It is quite certain that neither the thief nor people buying the NFT from them has copyright. Whether Green has or ever had it is more open question. It might well be that Yuga Labs still has it or that no one has it because the apes are not copyrightable at all.
Marras Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 407

25th May 2022, 06:06 AM	#546
Wildy Adelaidean Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 11,363	Originally Posted by Marras Well, looking at the Terms and Conditions for the apes, the copyright is not at all clear because the terms are a contradictory mess and it isn't clear that the apes are even copyrightable in the US. All bets are off if some ape copyright case ends up in the court. I do see what you mean by the contradictory terms. Part i. states that you own the NFT and says that you own the art completely, but then in parts ii. and iii. states that Yuga Labs grants you an exclusive licence which makes it seem that they still own the IP to the ape picture. If you actually own the ape then you couldn't be granted an exclusive licence to anything because you'd get them automatically as the IP is transferred to you through ownership. In terms of the show I'd assume that Green provided a licence to the people making the show allowing them to use the ape in question. But then that would also depend on what that agreement says. Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey That is an interesting question. Presumably the thief will not assert any copyright claim, because that would require identifying themselves. But presumably by now this stolen NFT has be sold off, perhaps multiple times, to good-faith buyers who may be unhappy to see Green profiting off their IP. Theoretically you could "sell" the NFT from your scam account to another account you own and then try and claim copyright because the Etherium blockchain says you own the ape and the terms of BAYC say that that is how ownership is determined.
	__________________

25th May 2022, 10:09 AM	#547
xjx388 Moderator Moderator Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 10,885	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey The ape-holders dilemma: Is a stolen ape still yours? https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...stolen-tv-show Copyright is quite clear here, these doodles are still Seth Green's property to use as he pleases no matter how many phishing links he might click. But, the blockchain is quite clear that Green is not the current owner. Green could be a crypto true believer and honor "code is law" and not move forward with this project that relies on IP the blockchain says does not belong to him. Or he could assert his copyright (rightly) and use these doodles regardless what the blockchain says, which makes you wonder what point attaching the NFT to this "art" was to begin with. It's interesting that Seth Green succumbed to a phishing scam. I get it, anyone can be a victim, but that really should make anyone think about why they are pouring so much money into something so fragile.
	__________________ Hello.

25th May 2022, 10:12 AM	#548
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by xjx388 It's interesting that Seth Green succumbed to a phishing scam. I get it, anyone can be a victim, but that really should make anyone think about why they are pouring so much money into something so fragile. Not really. NFTs is like a rube sifter. Only an absolute moron would pour more than petty change into such a dubious project. Anyone holding one of these high costs apes is, ipso facto, exactly the kind of rube that is easy to rip off.* It's like being surprised that everyone at a time-share seminar is prone to getting scammed. You have to have high levels of financial illiteracy to even be in this position. ETA: at least, this is true for good-faith NFT buyers. I'm sure there's plenty of quite intelligent types on the predatory side of things that understand exactly what the score is.
	Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 25th May 2022 at 10:16 AM.

25th May 2022, 10:21 AM	#549
I Am The Scum Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 4,717	Originally Posted by Wildy Theoretically you could "sell" the NFT from your scam account to another account you own and then try and claim copyright because the Etherium blockchain says you own the ape and the terms of BAYC say that that is how ownership is determined. Ownership of a reproducible medium (CD, book, etc.) does not imply copyright ownership. Also, I don't think there's anything BAYC can do to dictate how copyright transfer happens once it's out of their hands.

25th May 2022, 10:28 AM	#550
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole: Quote: The Owner Of Seth Green's Stolen Bored Ape Said They Have No Plans To Return It https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it. Quote: Green did not respond to requests for comment. But his tweets make it abundantly clear that he’s willing to pursue legal action to reclaim the asset. On Tuesday, Green tweeted that he would “rather meet @DarkWing84 to make a deal, vs in court.” While NFTs have only begun to make an appearance in case law, Eric Goldman, an intellectual property and technology law professor at Santa Clara University, previously told BuzzFeed News that buyers of looted NFTs would likely be criticized for “not doing their homework.” I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens.

25th May 2022, 10:44 AM	#551
Axxman300 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Central California Coast Posts: 6,194	NFTs are the Beanie Babies of the cyber world. If you can't see this one coming a mile away you might not be wise enough to have extra money in the first place.
	__________________ Disingenuous Piranha

25th May 2022, 11:30 AM	#552
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The Antimemetics Division Posts: 59,495	I get that the Gorillaz aesthetic isn't to everyone's taste, but personally I think the Bored Apes themselves are great art. Like Warhol's Soup Cans for a digital age. If they were being sold as unique physical artifacts, I'd happily buy sets of them and hang them on my walls at home. I'd even consider them likely to be a good investment.
	__________________ There is no Antimemetics Division.

25th May 2022, 11:32 AM	#553
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by theprestige I get that the Gorillaz aesthetic isn't to everyone's taste, but personally I think the Bored Apes themselves are great art. Like Warhol's Soup Cans for a digital age. If they were being sold as unique physical artifacts, I'd happily buy sets of them and hang them on my walls at home. I'd even consider them likely to be a good investment. You're in luck, the ability to decorate your home is one right click and trip to the print shop away!

25th May 2022, 11:42 AM	#554
gnome Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 13,035	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it. I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens. If it goes to court, how does Seth Green lose? The existence or control of an NFT is not part of current copyright considerations. I do not think Mr. Cheese can be considered a "bona fide purchaser" (the manner in which an innocent purchaser can sometimes retain title despite adverse claims) when there is no binding provision for the purchase of an NFT to transfer copyright.
	__________________

25th May 2022, 11:56 AM	#555
SuburbanTurkey Guest Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Null Posts: 15,479	Originally Posted by gnome If it goes to court, how does Seth Green lose? The existence or control of an NFT is not part of current copyright considerations. I do not think Mr. Cheese can be considered a "bona fide purchaser" (the manner in which an innocent purchaser can sometimes retain title despite adverse claims) when there is no binding provision for the purchase of an NFT to transfer copyright. I have no idea how binding these terms of service for these NFTs would be. I think he has a great chance to prevail in court should he choose to sue. I also think there's a good chance the NFT community would turn on him if he did that, because a court declaring that he retains ownership of an NFT the blockchain unambiguously states belongs to someone else would amount to heresy.

25th May 2022, 12:05 PM	#556
gnome Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 13,035	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey I have no idea how binding these terms of service for these NFTs would be. I think he has a great chance to prevail in court should he choose to sue. I also think there's a good chance the NFT community would turn on him if he did that, because a court declaring that he retains ownership of an NFT the blockchain unambiguously states belongs to someone else would amount to heresy. Even worse, it might also depress prices in the NFT market.
	__________________

25th May 2022, 12:41 PM	#557
Olmstead Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 1,028	Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey Time to find out if Seth Green sticks to the cyrpto ethos, or goes crying to daddy government to make him whole: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...ored-ape-owner Assuming this is true, the person described bought the stolen NFT in good faith, not knowing it was stolen. If you put any stock into the idea that "code is law" and that the public ledger is to be trusted, than Mr. Cheese owns this thing and Seth Green does not have any claim to it. I wonder how the NFT community will take this if it happens. Is everyone in the NFT economy sniffing glue? If Seth Greene owns the requisite rights, he can just mint a new NFT with exactly the same assets. And if he doesn't own those rights, good luck using it commercially for anything other than a resale in the first place. The actual owner of those rights will come knocking the moment there's money to be made, and the judge won't care who owns a digital wafer.